Purpose

To consolidate, disseminate, and gather information concerning the 710 expansion into our San Rafael neighborhood and into our surrounding neighborhoods. If you have an item that you would like posted on this blog, please e-mail the item to Peggy Drouet at pdrouet@earthlink.net

Monday, October 21, 2013

“Sit-able cities” might be even better than walkable ones

Walkable cities are great. But once you get where you’re walking, you want to relax, right? Urbanism Without Effort author Chuck Wolfe argues in a blog post that ample public places to gather, rest, and converse are even more important for a city than how walkable it is:

Simply stated, walkable is good, but sit-able is better.
And it’s time for the next big focal point and the next big idea, The
Sit-able City …

[S]it-able places are key, interdisciplinary focal points where the
delight of “placemaking” and cultural traditions of “watching the world
go by” merge with the sometimes conflicting domains of law and politics,
economic development, public safety, gentrification and the homeless.

Sit-able cities are ones with plenty of park benches, space for
street vendors, and dining al fresco. But there’s more to it than that,
Wolfe says. These places provide safe, comfortable seating for
conversation and contemplation, adding to a city’s “place capital,” he
writes. Transportation is ephemeral; sitting is eternal. (Or so he would
imply.) I think the point is that a good city brings people together
safely, quickly, and easily — and then gives them the space to hang out
once they’re there.

It seems like a bit of a false dichotomy — can you think of a
walkable city that’s not a sit-able one? Or vice versa — a freeway lined
with quaint cafés? To some extent, walkable and sit-able go
hand-in-hand. (And to get way literal, any city that’s not completely
vertical is technically a sit-able one.)

And I wouldn’t be so quick to write off walking as merely utilitarian
and destination-oriented. Just like sitting, walking — through a park,
to lunch with a coworker — can be the backdrop for conversation or
simply enjoying your surroundings. But ultimately Wolfe is right. Urban
planners should not only consider whether a city can be traversed on
foot, but whether people have spaces to congregate when they get where
they’re going.